[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Gal 3 and the curse
When Paul was railing against the Joshua/Jesus messianism,
before something happened that caused him to reorient himself,
what sorts of arguments is he likely to have used? If his
approach approximated what he does when arguing for the inbreak
of eschatological fulfilment in Joshua/Jesus, he would have made
use of Jewish scriptural texts. What texts? Is it likely that he
would not have noticed, or been shown, the Deut curse passage?
Probably it was a key weapon in his arsenal!
If so, what does he do when his experience makes it impossible to
continue to oppose the claim that Joshua/Jesus is somehow God's
key agent? He could reject his former scriptural approach to
understanding what was happening, or he could make the necessary
adjustments. Obviously, he did the latter. The text (in this case
"cursed is the executed criminal displayed on a stake") still had
its validity, but it indicated that the times had changed -- how
could God's messiah be at the same time cursed by the law? This
could make sense if the very presence of God's messiah is itself
a terminal point for the validity of the law! "Messiah is the end
of the law." Paul could not deny his experience -- Joshua/Jesus is
God's special messianic agent in the last times. And he could not
deny his commitment to the validity of the scriptures -- hanged
criminals are cursed. Eschatology is the key to Paul's perspective,
and helps unlock the mysteries of divine wisdom.
Bob Kraft, UPenn (wonder what other texts the persecuting Paul had
in his repertoire?)